|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On October 10 2020 06:54 Shingi11 wrote:
So Graham is refusing to test for the next debate even though he has been in close contact with 2 other senators that have tested postive. You have be such a piece of human garbage that you would risk peoples life and health just so republicans can keep a quorum in the Senate. Both sides are the same though right.
Republicans are remarkably more effective at wielding power to implement their agendas.
|
On October 10 2020 06:44 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2020 06:16 Starlightsun wrote:On October 10 2020 06:09 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 05:57 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 04:24 Danglars wrote:
Anybody detached enough from the partisan fight to give Bart and Durham praise for rejecting a report release prior to the election? Stand up and be counted, since I expect y’all would have particular venom if a spying report had been released in the next couple weeks from the DoJ. It's interesting that Durham's work product would be viewed as influencing the election. Is Joe Biden implicated? Because that would seem to be the only way it would impact the election. Sounds to me like the media succeeded in planting the belief that a Durham report would impact the election, despite there not being much substance to that belief. Wonder why the media doesn't want to see Durham's work product? I don't understand the hatred for the "media". Are Fox news, OAN, Breibart and so on also not part of the "media"? I mean it would be tiring to have to type out "the liberal biased fake-news media" every time. Yes but it would also show how silly it is. When you just write out the media it almost sounds more reasonable when really it is the opposite. I mean anytime you check out non partisan rankings of the "media" the ones that do the worst in terms of facts and bias are not the ones dood is complaining about. CNN does not score as well as say NPR but it does score better than Fox. And others like OAN are way out there. I get that people just think those are biased if they don't agree with their point of view. But at some point you want some objectivity on things. And it is not right wing bias from me I also want people to be more specific on what they mean by "socialism" and "propaganda" as well. There are a lot of fairly commonly used terms in this message board that people use completely differently.
I'm referring to the liberal portion of the media which I think has more market share and is more powerful than the conservative portion. And they really don't like durhams investigation, despite durhams reputation for being impartial.
|
On October 10 2020 06:57 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2020 06:54 Shingi11 wrote:
So Graham is refusing to test for the next debate even though he has been in close contact with 2 other senators that have tested postive. You have be such a piece of human garbage that you would risk peoples life and health just so republicans can keep a quorum in the Senate. Both sides are the same though right. Republicans are remarkably more effective at wielding power to implement their agendas.
So wait, just so I understand, the guy has high likelihood of being infected and could spread it to who knows how many people and could cause great harm to there health and that is ok in your books.
|
On October 10 2020 06:40 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2020 05:57 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 04:24 Danglars wrote:
Anybody detached enough from the partisan fight to give Bart and Durham praise for rejecting a report release prior to the election? Stand up and be counted, since I expect y’all would have particular venom if a spying report had been released in the next couple weeks from the DoJ. It's interesting that Durham's work product would be viewed as influencing the election. Is Joe Biden implicated? Because that would seem to be the only way it would impact the election. Sounds to me like the media succeeded in planting the belief that a Durham report would impact the election, despite there not being much substance to that belief. Wonder why the media doesn't want to see Durham's work product? Do you really not see how a report that clears Biden could have an impact on the election in the same way one that implicates Biden could? Every report that finds nothing dampens the effects of the "just wait for another report" crowd on the right, just like every report that found nothing or was redacted to find nothing dampened the "just wait for the final report" crowd on the left.
Well no one who is complaining about a report before the election is referring to biden being cleared. They are just vaguely saying the DOJ shouldn't do things that influence elections. But it doesn't seem like this report really has much of anything to do with biden - so I'm wondering what the concern is. As Danglars points out, Biden advocated for prosecuting Flynn for the Logan Act, which isn't a great look but it's nowhere near as bad as the mountain of other damning facts we have about the collusion investigation.
|
On October 10 2020 07:07 Shingi11 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2020 06:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 10 2020 06:54 Shingi11 wrote:
So Graham is refusing to test for the next debate even though he has been in close contact with 2 other senators that have tested postive. You have be such a piece of human garbage that you would risk peoples life and health just so republicans can keep a quorum in the Senate. Both sides are the same though right. Republicans are remarkably more effective at wielding power to implement their agendas. So wait, just so I understand, the guy has high likelihood of being infected and could spread it to who knows how many people and could cause great harm to there health and that is ok in your books.
Of course not?
|
On October 10 2020 07:14 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2020 07:07 Shingi11 wrote:On October 10 2020 06:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 10 2020 06:54 Shingi11 wrote:
So Graham is refusing to test for the next debate even though he has been in close contact with 2 other senators that have tested postive. You have be such a piece of human garbage that you would risk peoples life and health just so republicans can keep a quorum in the Senate. Both sides are the same though right. Republicans are remarkably more effective at wielding power to implement their agendas. So wait, just so I understand, the guy has high likelihood of being infected and could spread it to who knows how many people and could cause great harm to there health and that is ok in your books. Of course not?
Sorry my bad.
I guess I was reading it as you where ok that Graham was not testing.
|
On October 10 2020 06:54 Shingi11 wrote:
So Graham is refusing to test for the next debate even though he has been in close contact with 2 other senators that have tested postive. You have be such a piece of human garbage that you would risk peoples life and health just so republicans can keep a quorum in the Senate. Both sides are the same though right.
Trump wanted Biden and him to be tested for drugs before the first debate. Wonder how he's feeling about that for the next one, now that he's been fed steroids ^^
|
|
|
On October 10 2020 07:28 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2020 07:06 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 06:44 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 06:16 Starlightsun wrote:On October 10 2020 06:09 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 05:57 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 04:24 Danglars wrote:
Anybody detached enough from the partisan fight to give Bart and Durham praise for rejecting a report release prior to the election? Stand up and be counted, since I expect y’all would have particular venom if a spying report had been released in the next couple weeks from the DoJ. It's interesting that Durham's work product would be viewed as influencing the election. Is Joe Biden implicated? Because that would seem to be the only way it would impact the election. Sounds to me like the media succeeded in planting the belief that a Durham report would impact the election, despite there not being much substance to that belief. Wonder why the media doesn't want to see Durham's work product? I don't understand the hatred for the "media". Are Fox news, OAN, Breibart and so on also not part of the "media"? I mean it would be tiring to have to type out "the liberal biased fake-news media" every time. Yes but it would also show how silly it is. When you just write out the media it almost sounds more reasonable when really it is the opposite. I mean anytime you check out non partisan rankings of the "media" the ones that do the worst in terms of facts and bias are not the ones dood is complaining about. CNN does not score as well as say NPR but it does score better than Fox. And others like OAN are way out there. I get that people just think those are biased if they don't agree with their point of view. But at some point you want some objectivity on things. And it is not right wing bias from me I also want people to be more specific on what they mean by "socialism" and "propaganda" as well. There are a lot of fairly commonly used terms in this message board that people use completely differently. I'm referring to the liberal portion of the media which I think has more market share and is more powerful than the conservative portion. And they really don't like durhams investigation, despite durhams reputation for being impartial. Does Fox News have that much less of the Market share than CNN? Also, on Radio I don't believe anyone on the left side gets paid like Rush, wouldn't this suggest he has a pretty big market share and power? I always thought it was pretty equal, other than that there are more Liberal Americans than conservatives, meaning like the numbers are similar to the popular vote numbers. How do you define powerful in regards to the Media and why do the liberals have more?
Fox New has more market share than any other network.
|
Northern Ireland26799 Posts
On October 10 2020 07:31 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2020 07:28 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 07:06 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 06:44 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 06:16 Starlightsun wrote:On October 10 2020 06:09 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 05:57 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 04:24 Danglars wrote:
Anybody detached enough from the partisan fight to give Bart and Durham praise for rejecting a report release prior to the election? Stand up and be counted, since I expect y’all would have particular venom if a spying report had been released in the next couple weeks from the DoJ. It's interesting that Durham's work product would be viewed as influencing the election. Is Joe Biden implicated? Because that would seem to be the only way it would impact the election. Sounds to me like the media succeeded in planting the belief that a Durham report would impact the election, despite there not being much substance to that belief. Wonder why the media doesn't want to see Durham's work product? I don't understand the hatred for the "media". Are Fox news, OAN, Breibart and so on also not part of the "media"? I mean it would be tiring to have to type out "the liberal biased fake-news media" every time. Yes but it would also show how silly it is. When you just write out the media it almost sounds more reasonable when really it is the opposite. I mean anytime you check out non partisan rankings of the "media" the ones that do the worst in terms of facts and bias are not the ones dood is complaining about. CNN does not score as well as say NPR but it does score better than Fox. And others like OAN are way out there. I get that people just think those are biased if they don't agree with their point of view. But at some point you want some objectivity on things. And it is not right wing bias from me I also want people to be more specific on what they mean by "socialism" and "propaganda" as well. There are a lot of fairly commonly used terms in this message board that people use completely differently. I'm referring to the liberal portion of the media which I think has more market share and is more powerful than the conservative portion. And they really don't like durhams investigation, despite durhams reputation for being impartial. Does Fox News have that much less of the Market share than CNN? Also, on Radio I don't believe anyone on the left side gets paid like Rush, wouldn't this suggest he has a pretty big market share and power? I always thought it was pretty equal, other than that there are more Liberal Americans than conservatives, meaning like the numbers are similar to the popular vote numbers. How do you define powerful in regards to the Media and why do the liberals have more? Fox New has more market share than any other network.
While market share is of course part of it, I guess in the current age the important metric in terms of influence is how prevalent your talking points are on various internet platforms.
I would imagine if we had all the data in the world and ways to model it that Fox’s conversion rate of talking point to influence would be crazy high.
|
On October 10 2020 07:28 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2020 07:06 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 06:44 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 06:16 Starlightsun wrote:On October 10 2020 06:09 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 05:57 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 04:24 Danglars wrote:
Anybody detached enough from the partisan fight to give Bart and Durham praise for rejecting a report release prior to the election? Stand up and be counted, since I expect y’all would have particular venom if a spying report had been released in the next couple weeks from the DoJ. It's interesting that Durham's work product would be viewed as influencing the election. Is Joe Biden implicated? Because that would seem to be the only way it would impact the election. Sounds to me like the media succeeded in planting the belief that a Durham report would impact the election, despite there not being much substance to that belief. Wonder why the media doesn't want to see Durham's work product? I don't understand the hatred for the "media". Are Fox news, OAN, Breibart and so on also not part of the "media"? I mean it would be tiring to have to type out "the liberal biased fake-news media" every time. Yes but it would also show how silly it is. When you just write out the media it almost sounds more reasonable when really it is the opposite. I mean anytime you check out non partisan rankings of the "media" the ones that do the worst in terms of facts and bias are not the ones dood is complaining about. CNN does not score as well as say NPR but it does score better than Fox. And others like OAN are way out there. I get that people just think those are biased if they don't agree with their point of view. But at some point you want some objectivity on things. And it is not right wing bias from me I also want people to be more specific on what they mean by "socialism" and "propaganda" as well. There are a lot of fairly commonly used terms in this message board that people use completely differently. I'm referring to the liberal portion of the media which I think has more market share and is more powerful than the conservative portion. And they really don't like durhams investigation, despite durhams reputation for being impartial. Does Fox News have that much less of the Market share than CNN? Also, on Radio I don't believe anyone on the left side gets paid like Rush, wouldn't this suggest he has a pretty big market share and power? I always thought it was pretty equal, other than that there are more Liberal Americans than conservatives, meaning like the numbers are similar to the popular vote numbers. How do you define powerful in regards to the Media and why do the liberals have more?
Conservatives are much loyal listeners of the media, especially radio.
Fox News is one of the least influential numberwise. Its influence would be limited if it wasn't a favorite of those in DC, who prefer to watch an hour or two of shows on DVR rather than listen to 8 hours of radio shows (there's also a classist element : RW radio is stereotypically blue collar, working poor entertainment while Fox is a bit classier).
The average number of listeners per day to RW talk radio is ~40 million iirc (Hannity has hit 17-20 million consistently in the past). A lot of those are probably repeat listeners who listen to talk radio all day - so they listen to Hannity and Rush.
8 of the top 20 radio shows are conservative talk radio. Only one is progressive. (Another can be sorted as being Trump favorable, Coast to Coast, but not conservative, due to its conspiracy theorism). Four are generic news magazines like BBC, NPR, one is an NPR gameshow. Their overall numbers are dwarfed by conservative radio though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-listened-to_radio_programs
|
On October 10 2020 07:28 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2020 07:06 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 06:44 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 06:16 Starlightsun wrote:On October 10 2020 06:09 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 05:57 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 04:24 Danglars wrote:
Anybody detached enough from the partisan fight to give Bart and Durham praise for rejecting a report release prior to the election? Stand up and be counted, since I expect y’all would have particular venom if a spying report had been released in the next couple weeks from the DoJ. It's interesting that Durham's work product would be viewed as influencing the election. Is Joe Biden implicated? Because that would seem to be the only way it would impact the election. Sounds to me like the media succeeded in planting the belief that a Durham report would impact the election, despite there not being much substance to that belief. Wonder why the media doesn't want to see Durham's work product? I don't understand the hatred for the "media". Are Fox news, OAN, Breibart and so on also not part of the "media"? I mean it would be tiring to have to type out "the liberal biased fake-news media" every time. Yes but it would also show how silly it is. When you just write out the media it almost sounds more reasonable when really it is the opposite. I mean anytime you check out non partisan rankings of the "media" the ones that do the worst in terms of facts and bias are not the ones dood is complaining about. CNN does not score as well as say NPR but it does score better than Fox. And others like OAN are way out there. I get that people just think those are biased if they don't agree with their point of view. But at some point you want some objectivity on things. And it is not right wing bias from me I also want people to be more specific on what they mean by "socialism" and "propaganda" as well. There are a lot of fairly commonly used terms in this message board that people use completely differently. I'm referring to the liberal portion of the media which I think has more market share and is more powerful than the conservative portion. And they really don't like durhams investigation, despite durhams reputation for being impartial. Does Fox News have that much less of the Market share than CNN? Also, on Radio I don't believe anyone on the left side gets paid like Rush, wouldn't this suggest he has a pretty big market share and power? I always thought it was pretty equal, other than that there are more Liberal Americans than conservatives, meaning like the numbers are similar to the popular vote numbers. How do you define powerful in regards to the Media and why do the liberals have more?
Fox as an individual outlet does very well, but there are numerous liberal outlets that, combined, have more power. And I would define power in terms of their ability to drive the national conversation. Take the collusion hysteria for example - lasted for 3 years (now it has dropped of the map, which is interesting if it's so possible that our president is compromised) at a fever pitch.
|
On October 10 2020 07:22 Shingi11 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2020 07:14 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 10 2020 07:07 Shingi11 wrote:On October 10 2020 06:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 10 2020 06:54 Shingi11 wrote:
So Graham is refusing to test for the next debate even though he has been in close contact with 2 other senators that have tested postive. You have be such a piece of human garbage that you would risk peoples life and health just so republicans can keep a quorum in the Senate. Both sides are the same though right. Republicans are remarkably more effective at wielding power to implement their agendas. So wait, just so I understand, the guy has high likelihood of being infected and could spread it to who knows how many people and could cause great harm to there health and that is ok in your books. Of course not? Sorry my bad. I guess I was reading it as you where ok that Graham was not testing.
Nope. Terribly curious why Democrats would be in his presence granted the reasonable implications of his refusal to test though?
|
|
|
Second debate has been officially canceled after Trump refused to a virtual debate. Biden will be holding a townhall on ABC and Trump is planning ... something (no official details yet) to compete.
So, will we have a LR thread for the dueling events? Whole thing is kind of a shit show.
Per bloomberg news reporter :
|
On October 10 2020 08:38 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2020 07:28 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 07:06 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 06:44 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 06:16 Starlightsun wrote:On October 10 2020 06:09 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 05:57 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 04:24 Danglars wrote:
Anybody detached enough from the partisan fight to give Bart and Durham praise for rejecting a report release prior to the election? Stand up and be counted, since I expect y’all would have particular venom if a spying report had been released in the next couple weeks from the DoJ. It's interesting that Durham's work product would be viewed as influencing the election. Is Joe Biden implicated? Because that would seem to be the only way it would impact the election. Sounds to me like the media succeeded in planting the belief that a Durham report would impact the election, despite there not being much substance to that belief. Wonder why the media doesn't want to see Durham's work product? I don't understand the hatred for the "media". Are Fox news, OAN, Breibart and so on also not part of the "media"? I mean it would be tiring to have to type out "the liberal biased fake-news media" every time. Yes but it would also show how silly it is. When you just write out the media it almost sounds more reasonable when really it is the opposite. I mean anytime you check out non partisan rankings of the "media" the ones that do the worst in terms of facts and bias are not the ones dood is complaining about. CNN does not score as well as say NPR but it does score better than Fox. And others like OAN are way out there. I get that people just think those are biased if they don't agree with their point of view. But at some point you want some objectivity on things. And it is not right wing bias from me I also want people to be more specific on what they mean by "socialism" and "propaganda" as well. There are a lot of fairly commonly used terms in this message board that people use completely differently. I'm referring to the liberal portion of the media which I think has more market share and is more powerful than the conservative portion. And they really don't like durhams investigation, despite durhams reputation for being impartial. Does Fox News have that much less of the Market share than CNN? Also, on Radio I don't believe anyone on the left side gets paid like Rush, wouldn't this suggest he has a pretty big market share and power? I always thought it was pretty equal, other than that there are more Liberal Americans than conservatives, meaning like the numbers are similar to the popular vote numbers. How do you define powerful in regards to the Media and why do the liberals have more? Fox as an individual outlet does very well, but there are numerous liberal outlets that, combined, have more power. And I would define power in terms of their ability to drive the national conversation. Take the collusion hysteria for example - lasted for 3 years (now it has dropped of the map, which is interesting if it's so possible that our president is compromised) at a fever pitch.
Is it really any different from the Clinton email hysteria? If anything, CNN and MSNBC carrying the Fox News angle on Clinton's email server and emails would suggest that neither of those outfits are all that liberal.
The main difference between the news outlets is that CNN and MSNBC aren't really ideologs, unlike most of Rupert Murdoch's outfits who transparently carry water for whatever country's conservative party. They're in it for the ratings, which is the whole point of most of the Russian collusion angle. It generated a lot of views. If MSNBC was actually "liberal", they wouldn't be handing shows to guys like Joe Scarborough who believe segregation-era Alabama was full of peace and racial respect but we don't actually live in that world. That's where Fox News' power comes from: they're actually dictating and pushing the messaging of the conservative party in lockstep. MSNBC and CNN don't do that, they will shit all over liberals if it means they can get views and fill air time.
As for the reason Trump's Russia connections fell off the map, this is 2020. I think everyone is more concerned about coronavirus because that thing is killing thousands of Americans in real time and giving many more lasting organ damage whether it be sensory or something more serious like heart and lungs. But that could just be me speaking. CNN and MSNBC tried to bring it up again when we got part of Trump's tax returns but that got drowned out when Trump decided to be a super spreader and get half of the Whitehouse infected with the virus.
|
|
|
On October 10 2020 09:15 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2020 08:38 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 07:28 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 07:06 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 06:44 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 06:16 Starlightsun wrote:On October 10 2020 06:09 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 05:57 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 04:24 Danglars wrote:
Anybody detached enough from the partisan fight to give Bart and Durham praise for rejecting a report release prior to the election? Stand up and be counted, since I expect y’all would have particular venom if a spying report had been released in the next couple weeks from the DoJ. It's interesting that Durham's work product would be viewed as influencing the election. Is Joe Biden implicated? Because that would seem to be the only way it would impact the election. Sounds to me like the media succeeded in planting the belief that a Durham report would impact the election, despite there not being much substance to that belief. Wonder why the media doesn't want to see Durham's work product? I don't understand the hatred for the "media". Are Fox news, OAN, Breibart and so on also not part of the "media"? I mean it would be tiring to have to type out "the liberal biased fake-news media" every time. Yes but it would also show how silly it is. When you just write out the media it almost sounds more reasonable when really it is the opposite. I mean anytime you check out non partisan rankings of the "media" the ones that do the worst in terms of facts and bias are not the ones dood is complaining about. CNN does not score as well as say NPR but it does score better than Fox. And others like OAN are way out there. I get that people just think those are biased if they don't agree with their point of view. But at some point you want some objectivity on things. And it is not right wing bias from me I also want people to be more specific on what they mean by "socialism" and "propaganda" as well. There are a lot of fairly commonly used terms in this message board that people use completely differently. I'm referring to the liberal portion of the media which I think has more market share and is more powerful than the conservative portion. And they really don't like durhams investigation, despite durhams reputation for being impartial. Does Fox News have that much less of the Market share than CNN? Also, on Radio I don't believe anyone on the left side gets paid like Rush, wouldn't this suggest he has a pretty big market share and power? I always thought it was pretty equal, other than that there are more Liberal Americans than conservatives, meaning like the numbers are similar to the popular vote numbers. How do you define powerful in regards to the Media and why do the liberals have more? Fox as an individual outlet does very well, but there are numerous liberal outlets that, combined, have more power. And I would define power in terms of their ability to drive the national conversation. Take the collusion hysteria for example - lasted for 3 years (now it has dropped of the map, which is interesting if it's so possible that our president is compromised) at a fever pitch. TBH I think people think his handling of Covid is worse, and that is what dominates the conversation. I also think there is a lot of people hoping that when the investigation closes in NY we will have much better idea since only republicans who support Trump believe Barr is capable of a impartial investigation or even close to one into anything Trump related.
Well the media has certainly primed the left to disbelieve everything associsted with barr and that is probably on purpose. But when you look at what barr has actually done it's not so bad. E.g. He issued conclusions for the mueller team after the mueller team declined to do so, and the left didn't like those conclusions so barr is biased. The problem for the trump hating dems & the media is that barr has handed off investigations to dedicated career public servants such as durham.
|
On October 10 2020 09:57 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2020 09:15 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 08:38 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 07:28 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 07:06 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 06:44 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 06:16 Starlightsun wrote:On October 10 2020 06:09 JimmiC wrote:On October 10 2020 05:57 Doodsmack wrote:On October 10 2020 04:24 Danglars wrote:
Anybody detached enough from the partisan fight to give Bart and Durham praise for rejecting a report release prior to the election? Stand up and be counted, since I expect y’all would have particular venom if a spying report had been released in the next couple weeks from the DoJ. It's interesting that Durham's work product would be viewed as influencing the election. Is Joe Biden implicated? Because that would seem to be the only way it would impact the election. Sounds to me like the media succeeded in planting the belief that a Durham report would impact the election, despite there not being much substance to that belief. Wonder why the media doesn't want to see Durham's work product? I don't understand the hatred for the "media". Are Fox news, OAN, Breibart and so on also not part of the "media"? I mean it would be tiring to have to type out "the liberal biased fake-news media" every time. Yes but it would also show how silly it is. When you just write out the media it almost sounds more reasonable when really it is the opposite. I mean anytime you check out non partisan rankings of the "media" the ones that do the worst in terms of facts and bias are not the ones dood is complaining about. CNN does not score as well as say NPR but it does score better than Fox. And others like OAN are way out there. I get that people just think those are biased if they don't agree with their point of view. But at some point you want some objectivity on things. And it is not right wing bias from me I also want people to be more specific on what they mean by "socialism" and "propaganda" as well. There are a lot of fairly commonly used terms in this message board that people use completely differently. I'm referring to the liberal portion of the media which I think has more market share and is more powerful than the conservative portion. And they really don't like durhams investigation, despite durhams reputation for being impartial. Does Fox News have that much less of the Market share than CNN? Also, on Radio I don't believe anyone on the left side gets paid like Rush, wouldn't this suggest he has a pretty big market share and power? I always thought it was pretty equal, other than that there are more Liberal Americans than conservatives, meaning like the numbers are similar to the popular vote numbers. How do you define powerful in regards to the Media and why do the liberals have more? Fox as an individual outlet does very well, but there are numerous liberal outlets that, combined, have more power. And I would define power in terms of their ability to drive the national conversation. Take the collusion hysteria for example - lasted for 3 years (now it has dropped of the map, which is interesting if it's so possible that our president is compromised) at a fever pitch. TBH I think people think his handling of Covid is worse, and that is what dominates the conversation. I also think there is a lot of people hoping that when the investigation closes in NY we will have much better idea since only republicans who support Trump believe Barr is capable of a impartial investigation or even close to one into anything Trump related. Well the media has certainly primed the left to disbelieve everything associsted with barr and that is probably on purpose. But when you look at what barr has actually done it's not so bad. E.g. He issued conclusions for the mueller team after the mueller team declined to do so, and the left didn't like those conclusions so barr is biased. The problem for the trump hating dems & the media is that barr has handed off investigations to dedicated career public servants such as durham.
Barr did that himself by transparently interjecting himself into everything.
Its like you have hysteria over the handling of the Russian collusion stories and only that. There's more to American political life than possible (or not possible) Russian collusion, despite your posts only suggesting that to be the only thing that exists in American political life. Its like you're the other side to what you believe CNN and MSNBC to be.
|
On October 10 2020 09:49 JimmiC wrote:
There is something so Trump about him being the reason it is having to be virtual and him skipping it because it is virtual.
The reason he is likely skipping it is because of how awful he did last time. He can act like it was a fluke or something right now, if he does it again and crashes and burns it would be completely over. This way he can have only people who like him in attendance and have all the questions softball and answers prepared ahead of time. I imagine covid and him having to survive standing there for an hour was a big part of him cancelling. It going virtual just gave him an excuse but he would have found something else otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
